Dodecad k12b West, Central & South Asian results Vol. 3

Bender1999 · 11-24-2020, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

The guy is an Onoghur Bulgar.

He dates to the period of Great Bulgaria and Khazaria and lies in the middle of Great Bulgaria. Khazars were probably didn't even settled in the westernmost corner of their state during their rule, but used those Bulgars who already settled there as their subject.

On the other hand, Khazar samples from another study show they were carrying more East Eurasian than this sample.

This clarifies the supposedly Bulgar origin of Kazan Tatars and shows how East Eurasian(Altaic) heritage went down over time.

Remember, Uyelgi and the rest of the Magyar samples we had also has been showing Bashkirs as their closest population. And remember the Turkic(Onoghur) language influences on modern-day Magyar. Both groups shows the Hunnic origin and a form of confederation. (Ugor-Onogur)

Ugor dominated Hungary. Turkic dominated Bulgaria. Then Slavic migrations dominated Bulgaria, again.
Onogur dominated the Urals. Then Kipchak migrations dominated the Urals, again.

Interesting...

[19,] "Turk_Deliorman" "32.0611"
[20,] "HUN_Szekely" "32.1106"

Thanks for your correction, i just found this as Khazar, i was not sure and never saw a Khazar result. And i agree, imo the Greater Bulgaria was too short lived for any long term settlements, although i believe they left genetic traces in Caucasus(like other Turkics, but i am not sure to what extent comparing to other like Khazars or Kipchaks).

The other Khazar results would state, if they really were Oghurs/Onoghurs, the confederate character of Onoghurs(in my knowledge Oghur has the same meaning like Oghuz) like the Tokuzoghuz. I mean they had non Turkic tribes/elements inside their confederation with still predominant Turkic element, that would explain the nearly non and nearly fully east eurasian samples. I would say SW-Asia means just Caucasia and NE Asia Siberia+East Asia, right?

Ugor dominated Hungary. Turkic dominated Bulgaria. Then Slavic migrations dominated Bulgaria, again.
Onogur dominated the Urals. Then Kipchak migrations dominated the Urals, again.

Turkics were like hyperactive children ahhahahaha

**Kaspias** · 11-24-2020, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by Bender1999

Thanks for your correction, i just found this as Khazar, i was not sure and never saw a Khazar result. And i agree, imo the Greater Bulgaria was too short lived for any long term settlements, although i believe they left genetic traces in Caucasus(like other Turkics, but i am not sure to what extent comparing to other like Khazars or Kipchaks).

The other Khazar results would state, if they really were Oghurs/Onoghurs, the confederate character of Onoghurs(in my knowledge Oghur has the same meaning like Oghuz) like the Tokuzoghuz. I mean they had non Turkic tribes/elements inside their confederation with still predominant Turkic element, that would explain the nearly non and nearly fully east eurasian samples. I would say SW-Asia means just Caucasia and NE Asia Siberia+East Asia, right?

Turkics were like hyperactive children ahhahahaha

Oghur is not the same as Oghuz neither linguistically nor genetically. They supposed to be Steppe shifted considering their origin was West of Baikal even before Turkic migrations, while most other groups rooted from the East of Baikal. The language is extinct yet genetically Bashkir is literally an overlapping point of all types of Turkic's, a decent candidate for Proto-Turks.

The samples from Khazars are in the same parallel(slightly more EE) with Karluks, Karakhanids, Kimaks... See: 67, 1986, 619.

SW Asia is Gedrosia(TKM_N), NE Asia is Siberia(Devils_Gate_N).

**Leto** · 11-24-2020, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

Oghur is not the same as Oghuz neither linguistically nor genetically. They supposed to be Steppe shifted considering their origin was West of Baikal even before Turkic migrations, while most other groups rooted from the East of Baikal. The language is extinct yet genetically Bashkir is literally an overlapping point of all types of Turkic's, a decent candidate for Proto-Turks.

The samples from Khazars are in the same parallel(slightly more EE) with Karluks, Karakhanids, Kimaks... See: 67, 1986, 619.

SW Asia is Gedrosia(TKM_N), NE Asia is Siberia(Devils_Gate_N).

Can anyone get the Bashkir data from Balanovsky et al? The study had three Bashkir population, North, Center and South. I believe the Mongoloid range was 26-41%. Adding them to Dod would be awesome.

**Edgü** · 11-24-2020, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

Oghur is not the same as Oghuz neither linguistically nor genetically

You are wrong on that

... even reading the wikipedia would help

Bender1999 · 11-24-2020, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

Oghur is not the same as Oghuz neither linguistically nor genetically. They supposed to be Steppe shifted considering their origin was West of Baikal even before Turkic migrations, while most other groups rooted from the East of Baikal. The language is extinct yet genetically Bashkir is literally an overlapping point of all types of Turkic's, a decent candidate for Proto-Turks.

The samples from Khazars are in the same parallel(slightly more EE) with Karluks, Karakhanids, Kimaks... See: 67, 1986, 619.

SW Asia is Gedrosia(TKM_N), NE Asia is Siberia(Devils_Gate_N).

Oh yes i meant that the terms Oghuz and Oghur have the same meaning, didn’t it means something like tribe? To be honest until today i mostly dealt with other Turkic groups and now have no time for reading new stuff about Turkics. I just have fragmented knowledge about them and i even don’t know whether those informations are true or not. According to your information they weren’t really different about our imagination of early Turk(ic)s, imo the Onoghur sample whichi wrongly posted as Khazar is genetically the same like Göktürks just more European shifted.

Btw i once read a theory about Oghuz origins about Khazars, but i am very careful about those kind of informations. Genetically they seem to be more Euro shifted like you said than Oghuz groups.

**Edgü** · 11-25-2020, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by Bender1999

Oh yes i meant that the terms Oghuz and Oghur have the same meaning, didn’t it means something like tribe? To be honest until today i mostly dealt with other Turkic groups and now have no time for reading new stuff about Turkics. I just have fragmented knowledge about them and i even don’t know whether those informations are true or not. According to your information they weren’t really different about our imagination of early Turk(ic)s, imo the Onoghur sample whichi wrongly posted as Khazar is genetically the same like Göktürks just more European shifted.

Btw i once read a theory about Oghuz origins about Khazars, but i am very careful about those kind of informations. Genetically they seem to be more Euro shifted like you said than Oghuz groups.

He probably confused Oğuric people with Fin-Ugor people which is possible to happen

The stem uq-, oq- "kin, tribe" is from a Proto-Turkic *uk. The Old Turkic word has often been connected with oq "arrow";[1] Pohl (2002) in explanation of this connection adduces the Chinese T'ang-shu chronicle, which reports "the khan divided his realm into ten tribes. To the leader of each tribe, he sent an arrow. The name [of these ten leaders] was 'the ten she ', but they were also called 'the ten arrows'." [2][3] An oguz (ogur) was in origin a military division of a Nomadic empire, which acquired tribal or ethnic connotations, by processes of ethnogenesis.[3]

The Oghuz, Oguz or Ghuzz Turks (Old Turkic: ��‎, romanized: Oγuz, Middle Turkic: ٱغُز, romanized: Oγuz, Ottoman Turkish: اوغوز‎, romanized: Oġuz) were a western Turkic people that spoke the Oghuz branch of the Turkic language family.[1] In the 8th century, they formed a tribal confederation conventionally named the Oghuz Yabgu State in central Asia. The name Oghuz is a Common Turkic word for "tribe".

Linguistically, the Oghuz belong to the Common Turkic speaking group, characterized by sound correspondences such as Common Turkic /-š/ versus Oghuric /-l/ and Common Turkic /-z/ versus Oghuric /-r/.Within the Common Turkic group, the Oghuz languages share these innovations: loss of Proto-Turkic gutturals in suffix anlaut, loss of /ɣ/ except after /a/, /g/ becoming either /j/ or lost, voicing of /t/ to /d/ and of /k/ to /g/, and */ð/ becomes /j/.[10]

The name Onoğur is most often derived as On-Oğur "ten Oğurs (tribes)".[2] Modern scholars consider Turkic terms for tribe oğuz and oğur to be derived from Turkic *og/uq, meaning "kinship or being akin to".[3] The terms initially were not the same, as oq/ogsiz meant "arrow",[4] while oğul meant "offspring, child, son", oğuš/uğuš was "tribe, clan", and the verb oğša-/oqša meant "to be like, resemble".[3] The ethnonym Hungarian is derived from Onogurs (> (H)ungars).[5]

The Oghur languages are also known as "-r Turkic" because the final consonant in certain words is r, not z as in Common Turkic.[8] Chuvash: вăкăр - Turkish: öküz - Tatar: үгез - English: ox. Hence the name Oghur corresponds Oghuz in Common Turkic.[3] Other correspondences are Com. š : Oghur l (tâš : tâl, 'stone'); s > š; *č > ś; k/q > ğ; y > j, ś; d, δ > δ > z (10th cent.) > r (13th cent.)"; ğd > z > r (14th cent.); a > ı (after 9th cent.).[9][10]

Distinguished specialist in the history of Central Asia the late Denis Sinor believed that the differences noted above suggest that the Oghur-speaking tribes could not have originated in territories inhabited by speakers of Mongolic languages, given that Mongolian dialects feature the -z suffix.[11] Equally eminent historian Professor Golden, however, has noted that there are many loanwords in Mongolic from Oghur, such as Mong. ikere, Oghur. *ikir, Hung. iker, Comm. ikiz (twins).[3] and holds the contradictory view that the Oghur inhabited the borderlands of Mongolia prior to the 5th century.[12]

The Oghur tribes are often connected with the Hungarians whose exoethnonym is usually derived from Onogurs (> (H)ungars).[13] The Hungarians are of mixed Ugrian / Turkic heritage, with strong Oghur-Bulgar and Khazar influences.[14][15] Hungarian has many borrowings from Turkic and Oghur languages:[16] Hung. tenger, Oghur. *tengir, Comm. tengiz (sea),[3] Hung. gyűrű, Oghur. jürük, Comm. yüzük (ring),[17] and terms of equestrian culture ló (horse), nyereg (saddle), fék (bridle), ostor (whip).[18] A number of Hungarian loanwords were borrowed before the 9th century, shown by sz- (< Oğ. ś-) rather than Comm. gy- (< Oğ. ǰ-): example Hung. szél, Oghur. *śäl, Chuv. śil, Comm. yel (wind), Hung. szűcs (tailor), Hung. szőlő (grapes).[17]

The name Kutrigur, also recorded as Kwrtrgr, Κουτρίγουροι, Κουτούργουροι, Κοτρίγουροι, Κοτρίγοροι, Κουτρίγοροι, Κοτράγηροι, Κουτράγουροι, Κοτριαγήροι,[2] has been suggested as a metathecized form of Turkic *Toqur-Oğur, with *quturoğur meaning "nine Oğur (tribes)".[3] David Marshall Lang derived it from Turkic kötrügür (conspicuous, eminent, renowned).[4]

The name Ut(r)igur, recorded as Οὺτ(τ)ρίγουροι, Οὺτούργουροι and Οὺτρίγου, is generally considered as a metathecized form suggested by Gyula Németh of Turkic *Otur-Oğur, thus the *Uturğur mean "Thirty Oğurs (tribes)".[1] Lajos Ligeti proposed utur- (to resist),[2] while Louis Bazin uturkar (the victors-conquerors), Quturgur and qudurmaq (the enrages).[3]

The Onogurs were one of the first Oghuric Turkic tribes that entered the Ponto-Caspian steppes as the result of migrations set off in Inner Asia.[6] The 10th century Movses Kaghankatvatsi recorded, considered late 4th century, certain Honagur, "a Hun from the Honk" who raided Persia, which were related to the Onoghurs, and located near Transcaucasia and the Sassanian Empire.[9] Scholars also relate the Hyōn to this account.[9]

According to Priscus, in 463 the representatives of Ernak's Saraghurs (Oghur. sara, "White Oghurs"), Oghurs and Onoghurs came to the Emperor in Constantinople,[10] and explained they had been driven out of their homeland by the Sabirs, who had been attacked by the Avars in Inner Asia.[11][12] This tangle of events indicates that the Oghuric tribes are related to the Ting-ling and Tiele people.[13][14] It is considered they belonged to the westernmost Tiele tribes, which also included the Uyghurs-Toquz Oghuz and the Oghuz Turks, and were initially located in Western Siberia and Kazakhstan.[15] Leo I the Thracian granted Ernak the lands of the treacherous Karadach's Akatziroi roughly corresponding to 20th century Ukraine. Later kings of the Onogur Huns included Grod, Mugel and Sandilch whose Utigurs were engaged in a civil war against the Kutrigurs of Khinialon.

The origin of the Kutrigurs and Utigurs, who lived in the vicinity of the Onoghurs and Bulgars, and their mutual relationship is considered obscure.[16][17] Scholars consider unclear how the union between Onoghurs and Bulgars formed, viewing it as a long process in which a number of different groups merged.[18][19] During that time, the Bulgars may have represented a large confederation of which the Onoghurs formed one of the core tribes,[19] together with the remnants of the Utigurs and Kutrigurs, among others.[20]

Jordanes in Getica (551) mentioned that the Hunuguri (believed to be the Onoghurs) were notable for the marten skin trade.[21][22][23] In the Middle Ages, marten skin was used as a substitute for minted money.[24][9] This also indicates they lived near forests and were in contact with Finno-Ugrian peoples.[9][25]

The Syriac translation of the Pseudo–Zacharias Rhetor's Ecclesiastical History (c. 555) in Western Eurasia records the Avnagur (Aunagur; considered Onoghurs), wngwr (Onoğur), wgr (Oghur), described in typical phrases reserved for nomads in the ethnographic literature of the period, as people who "live in tents, earn their living on the meat of livestock and fish, of wild animals and by their weapons (plunder)".[21][26]

The Onoghurs (Oghurs), in the 6th and 7th century sources, were mentioned mostly in connection with the Avar and Göktürk conquest of Western Eurasia.[27] According to the 6th century Menander Protector, the "leader of the Οὐγούρων" had the authority of the Turk Yabgu Khagan in the region of Kuban River to the lower Don.[28]

In early 7th century Theophylaktos Simokattes recorded that certain Onoghur city Βακάθ was destroyed by an earthquake before his lifetime.[9] The Sogdian name indicates it was situated in the vicinity of Iranian Central Asia.[9]

Simokattes in the Letter of the Turk Qaγan (Tamgan) to the Emperor Maurikios recorded a complex notice:

"...the Qaghan set off on another undertaking and subjugated all the Ὀγώρ. This people is (one) of the most powerful because of their numbers and their training for war in full battle-gear. They have made their abodes towards the East, whence flows the river Τίλ, which the Turks have the custom of calling the "Black". The oldest chieftains of this people are called Οὐάρ and Χουννί."[28]

According to the Qaghan, part of those Ouar (Uar) and Khounni (Huns) who arrived to Eastern Europe were mistook by the Onoghurs, Barsils, Sabirs and other tribes for the original Avars, and as such the Uar and Huns took advantage of the situation and began call themselves Avars.[29] Simokattes also recounts "when the Ogor, then, were brought completely to heel, the Qaγan gave over the chief of the Κὸλχ (Kolx[28]) to the bite of the sword", shows Oghurs resistance toward Turkic authority.[28] Scholars consider if the Til is Qara Itil (Black Itil) i.e. Volga (Atil/Itil), then the mentioned Ὀγώρ would be the Oghurs, while if it is in Inner Asia, then it could be the Uyghurs.[28]

You can see names like Karadach or Ernak they are pretty much Turkic Karadach means Karadağ which is Kara "black" dağ "mountain" Ernak/Irnek is the archaic way to say Parmak in Turkic which means "Thumb"

**Kaspias** · 11-25-2020, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by Edgü

You are wrong on that

... even reading the wikipedia would help

Originally Posted by Bender1999

Oh yes i meant that the terms Oghuz and Oghur have the same meaning, didn’t it means something like tribe? To be honest until today i mostly dealt with other Turkic groups and now have no time for reading new stuff about Turkics. I just have fragmented knowledge about them and i even don’t know whether those informations are true or not. According to your information they weren’t really different about our imagination of early Turk(ic)s, imo the Onoghur sample whichi wrongly posted as Khazar is genetically the same like Göktürks just more European shifted.

Btw i once read a theory about Oghuz origins about Khazars, but i am very careful about those kind of informations. Genetically they seem to be more Euro shifted like you said than Oghuz groups.

Originally Posted by Edgü

He probably confused Oğuric people with Fin-Ugor people which is possible to happen

You can see names like Karadach or Ernak they are pretty much Turkic Karadach means Karadağ which is Kara "black" dağ "mountain" Ernak/Irnek is the archaic way to say Parmak in Turkic which means "Thumb"

I actually didn't confuse it and did not even comment on their name/lexical meaning. Of course, I'm aware of what you posted.

Look at the formation of common Turkic.

- Melting pot in Afanasievo, Asian speaker derived from East of Baikal.

Distance to: MNG_Afanasievo_1
0.11769365 Tajik_Rushan
0.11973994 Darginian
0.12346155 Mordovian

Distance to: MNG_Afanasievo_2
0.06078614 Khamnegan
0.07636600 Tuvinian
0.08163707 Mogush

A mix of both:

Distance to: Afanasievo1+2 -> In the same parallel with the results we have from BA.
0.05811461 Tatar_Siberian
0.07453513 Tubalar
0.07723235 Bashkir

Now see:

Common Turkic, Karluk, Kimak, Gokturk, Kipchak, Karakhanid and Proto Turk proxy Afanasievo gets 100% Altai_IA.
Bashkir gets 20% Fin-Ugor as an overlapping point.
Chuvash, who is an Oghur speaker, gets 80%.
Uyelgi, who was probably an Oghur as well, gets 35%.
Bulgar gets 12%.

This Indicates Oghur lived in the West of Baikal as isolated for some time and developed the language there although has the same origin as the others. Then migrated to the West without much interaction with the Common Turkic group. How do we understand it?

Oghur also carries the EHG-like ancestry, which shifts them Finno-Ugor, while Common Turkic carries Yamnaya-like Steppe admixture.

And in terms of linguistics, Chuvash is not mutually intelligible with Common Turkic family.

I'm pointing out the Ugor-Ogur relation and their influence on each other. They lived closer to each other compared to Common Turkic. And as a result, you see, Chuvash is genetically mostly Ugor yet speaks Ogur. Genetically the same goes for Kazan and Mishar Tatars, yet they speak the common Turkic.

Btw i once read a theory about Oghuz origins about Khazars, but i am very careful about those kind of informations. Genetically they seem to be more Euro shifted like you said than Oghuz groups.

They were a confederation. The samples from there were including Mongols, Iranics, various Turkics. I don't know if the elite was Oghuz or not yet considering they lived in the Western corner of Gokturks it is possible.

**Kaspias** · 11-25-2020, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by Leto

Can anyone get the Bashkir data from Balanovsky et al? The study had three Bashkir population, North, Center and South. I believe the Mongoloid range was 26-41%. Adding them to Dod would be awesome.

There is Bashkir data in:

1- The Genetic Legacy of the Expansion of Turkic-Speaking Nomads across Eurasia
2- Between Lake Baikal and the Baltic Sea: genomic history of the gateway to Europe

But these are in plink. I don't have access to my Linux and won't have it in a short period so can not convert them.

Which article did you mean?

**Edgü** · 11-25-2020, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

I actually didn't confuse it and did not even comment on their name/lexical meaning. Of course, I'm aware of what you posted.

Look at the formation of common Turkic.

- Melting pot in Afanasievo, Asian speaker derived from East of Baikal.

Distance to: MNG_Afanasievo_1
0.11769365 Tajik_Rushan
0.11973994 Darginian
0.12346155 Mordovian

Distance to: MNG_Afanasievo_2
0.06078614 Khamnegan
0.07636600 Tuvinian
0.08163707 Mogush

A mix of both:

Distance to: Afanasievo1+2 -> In the same parallel with the results we have from BA.
0.05811461 Tatar_Siberian
0.07453513 Tubalar
0.07723235 Bashkir

Now see:

Common Turkic, Karluk, Kimak, Gokturk, Kipchak, Karakhanid and Proto Turk proxy Afanasievo gets 100% Altai_IA.
Bashkir gets 20% Fin-Ugor as an overlapping point.
Chuvash, who is an Oghur speaker, gets 80%.
Uyelgi, who was probably an Oghur as well, gets 35%.
Bulgar gets 12%.

This Indicates Oghur lived in the West of Baikal as isolated for some time and developed the language there although has the same origin as the others. Then migrated to the West without much interaction with the Common Turkic group. How do we understand it?

Oghur also carries the EHG-like ancestry, which shifts them Finno-Ugor, while Common Turkic carries Yamnaya-like Steppe admixture.

And in terms of linguistics, Chuvash is not mutually intelligible with Common Turkic family.

I'm pointing out the Ugor-Ogur relation and their influence on each other. They lived closer to each other compared to Common Turkic. And as a result, you see, Chuvash is genetically mostly Ugor yet speaks Ogur. Genetically the same goes for Kazan and Mishar Tatars, yet they speak the common Turkic.

They were a confederation. The samples from there were including Mongols, Iranics, various Turkics. I don't know if the elite was Oghuz or not yet considering they lived in the Western corner of Gokturks it is possible.

Oğurlar arkaik Türklerdir ilk göçenlerdir EHG bulunması ve Ugorlarla sıkı-fıkı olmaları normaldir çünkü diğer Türkler tarafından dışlanmışlardır...

Şaka bir yana dediklerim az çok doğru Oğur kolu Türk dil grubu içindeki en özel kollardan biridir Yaygın Türkçede ise en özeli Khalaj Türkçesi'dir oda ne kadar İran'da konuşulsada ve Yaygın Türkçe grubunda olsada Oğur grubuna benzer ve onun gibi arkaik bileşenler taşır diğer Yaygın Türkçe dillerinde olmayan arkaik bileşenler

Neyse onu bunu boşver... Oğurları bu kadar ötekileştirmeye gerek yok zaten zamanında öyle yapmış atalarımız küsüp gitmişler başkalarıyla karışmışlar

Tabi işe ciddi bir şekilde bakarsak:

"Oghur is not the same as Oghuz neither linguistically nor genetically."

"And in terms of linguistics, Chuvash is not mutually intelligible with Common Turkic family."

Böyle olması normal çünkü Ön-Türkçe ve Ön-Bulğarca oluşurken erkenden bir kopma oldu (Bolğarlardan erken göç kararı) ki bu kopma Ön-Bulğarca'nın farklı bir şekilde gelişmesine sebep oldu tabi özünde yine aynı diller Linguistik olarak birbirine benzemiyor demek çok yanlış olur Ön-Türkçenin yeniden inşasını bile Bolğar grubunun en küçüğü olan Çuvaşçaya borçluyuz Ön-Türkçe yeniden inşa edilirken Linguistler birçok kez Çuvaşçadan yardım aldı

**Leto** · 11-25-2020, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by Kaspias

There is Bashkir data in:

1- The Genetic Legacy of the Expansion of Turkic-Speaking Nomads across Eurasia
2- Between Lake Baikal and the Baltic Sea: genomic history of the gateway to Europe

But these are in plink. I don't have access to my Linux and won't have it in a short period so can not convert them.

Which article did you mean?

I think that was a Central Asia paper from 2019.